[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 168 (Wednesday, November 19, 2003)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2329-E2330]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




CONFERENCE REPORT ON H.R. 1588, NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR 
                            FISCAL YEAR 2004

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                            HON. MARK UDALL

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                        Friday, November 7, 2003

  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, when this House voted on H.R. 
1588 in May, I voted against it. I didn't think the bill as it stood 
then was one I could endorse. The conference report that we are 
considering today is marginally better. Although I still have strong 
reservations, I will support the conference report.
  We are 2 years into our war on terrorism and still engaged in 
military action in Iraq. There is no doubt that we must continue to 
focus on defending our homeland against terrorism, we must support our 
military personnel, and we must give our military the training, 
equipment, and weapons it needs to beat terrorism around the world.
  That's why I'm in favor of provisions in the bill that support those 
men and women who have put their lives on the line in Afghanistan and 
Iraq. The bill provides an average 4.15 percent pay raise for service 
members, boosts military special pay and extends bonuses, and funds 
programs to improve living and working facilities on military 
installations.
  I am pleased that the report includes provisions recognizing the 
importance of non-citizen soldiers and the many sacrifices and 
contributions they have made. The report eases the naturalization 
process for these soldiers and their families, reducing to one year the 
length of service requirement for naturalization during peacetime; 
allowing soldiers to apply and take oaths for citizenship overseas; and 
granting permanent resident status to the surviving family of U.S. 
citizen soldiers who are granted posthumous citizenship as a result of 
death incurred in combat.
  I'm also pleased that this bill will allow approximately one-third of 
eligible disabled military retirees to receive both their retirement 
and disability benefits. I would have preferred that the bill extend 
this ``concurrent receipt'' to all disabled retirees, but this is a 
great improvement on the bill the House considered earlier this year--
which included no such provisions. I am also pleased that the bill 
extends the military's TRICARE health coverage to National Guard and 
reservists and their families if servicemembers have been called to 
active duty. These are all necessary and important provisions that I 
support.
  I do have a number of serious reservations about the bill.
  I don't believe it addresses 21st century threats as well as it 
could. With the exception of the Crusader artillery system, the 
Administration and Congress have continued every major weapons system 
inherited from previous administrations. So although the bill brings 
overall defense spending to levels 13 percent higher than the average 
Cold War levels, it doesn't present a coherent vision of how to realign 
our defense priorities.
  The bill still includes provisions that would exempt the Department 
of Defense from compliance with some requirements under the Endangered 
Species Act (ESA) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA). There is 
broad-based support for existing environmental laws--as there should 
be--and these laws already allow case-by-case flexibility to protect 
national security. The Pentagon has never sought to take advantage of 
this flexibility, so it strains belief that these laws are undermining 
our national security. Indeed, the General Accounting Office has found 
that training readiness remains high at military installations 
notwithstanding our environmental laws. I am not persuaded that the 
changes to these acts proposed by the military are justified.
  The bill still includes worrisome provisions to overhaul DOD's 
personnel system. Although they are improved from the bill the House 
considered earlier this year, these provisions would still strip DOD's 
civilian employees of worker rights relating to due process, appeals, 
and collective bargaining.
  Most disturbingly, the bill still includes provisions on nuclear 
weapons development. This bill provides funding to study the 
feasibility of developing nuclear earth-penetrating weapons and 
authorizes previously prohibited research on low-yield nuclear weapons. 
Low-yield nuclear weapons have an explosive yield of five kilotons or 
less--``only'' a third of the explosive yield of the bomb dropped on 
Hiroshima. Our obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of 
Nuclear Weapons (NPT) require the United States to work towards nuclear 
disarmament, rather than further increase the size and diversity of our 
arsenal. By continuing the development of new U.S. nuclear weapons at 
the same time that we are trying to convince other nations to forego 
obtaining such weapons, we undermine our credibility in the fight to 
stop nuclear proliferation.
  Mr. Speaker, I am very disappointed that this conference report rolls 
back civil service

[[Page E2330]]

protections, environmental protections, and our work in the area of 
nuclear nonproliferation. But some of these provisions were improved in 
conference, and the addition of concurrent receipt provisions for our 
nation's veterans is critical. In view of these changes to the bill, 
added to my belief in the importance of supporting our men and women in 
uniform, I will support the conference report today.

                          ____________________